지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학위논문
- 저자정보
- 지도교수
- 김상부
- 발행연도
- 2017
- 저작권
- 창원대학교 논문은 저작권에 의해 보호받습니다.
이용수4
이 논문의 연구 히스토리 (2)
- 이 논문의 후속연구가 궁금하신가요?
- 연관 학술논문 또는 학술발표를 통해 보다 발전된 연구결과를 확인하실 수 있습니다.
- 이 논문의 연구 히스토리 확인하기
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Recently, the reliability has been considered as one of the most
critical characteristics of a system. To achieve a target reliability of a
system, the system reliability is repeatedly predicted and verified
through its every stage of life cycle. Especially in its early development
stage, the reliability of a system is often predicted by use of reliability
prediction standards such as MIL-HDBK-217F and Telcordia SR-332.
In this thesis, a comparative study on reliability prediction standards
for electronic equipment including MIL-HDBK-217F and Telcordia SR-332
is made and some guidelines for choosing a reliability prediction
standard are suggested. As an illustrative example for system reliability
prediction using MIL-HDBK-217F and Telcordia SR-332, touch-machine
control panel case is given.
When comparing two system reliability prediction standards of
MIL-HDBK-217F and Telcordia SR-332, it shows that they use different
methods or formulae for predicting the failure rate of a system. They
- 135 -
use the different numerical values even for the same factors in each
failure rate prediction formula, and they also have some different base
failure rates for a given part. Furthermore, the failure rate prediction for
a part using MIL-HDBK-217F tends to depend mainly on quality or
environmental factors, whereas Telcordia SR-332 take the effects of
temperature or electrical stresses into account more than
MIL-HDBK-217F. As a guideline for choosing the reliability prediction
standard, it is suggested to use Telcordia SR-332 in most cases.
MIL-HDBK-217F, however, should be used when it is required to use by
the customers.
The case study of Touch-Machine Control Panel shows that the
predicted MTBF using Telcordia SR-332 is much larger than that of
MIL-HDBK-217F. The predicted MTBF of F company’s CNC system with
control panel implies that Telcordia SR-332 can be regarded as more
accurate prediction method than MIL-HDBK-217F.
critical characteristics of a system. To achieve a target reliability of a
system, the system reliability is repeatedly predicted and verified
through its every stage of life cycle. Especially in its early development
stage, the reliability of a system is often predicted by use of reliability
prediction standards such as MIL-HDBK-217F and Telcordia SR-332.
In this thesis, a comparative study on reliability prediction standards
for electronic equipment including MIL-HDBK-217F and Telcordia SR-332
is made and some guidelines for choosing a reliability prediction
standard are suggested. As an illustrative example for system reliability
prediction using MIL-HDBK-217F and Telcordia SR-332, touch-machine
control panel case is given.
When comparing two system reliability prediction standards of
MIL-HDBK-217F and Telcordia SR-332, it shows that they use different
methods or formulae for predicting the failure rate of a system. They
- 135 -
use the different numerical values even for the same factors in each
failure rate prediction formula, and they also have some different base
failure rates for a given part. Furthermore, the failure rate prediction for
a part using MIL-HDBK-217F tends to depend mainly on quality or
environmental factors, whereas Telcordia SR-332 take the effects of
temperature or electrical stresses into account more than
MIL-HDBK-217F. As a guideline for choosing the reliability prediction
standard, it is suggested to use Telcordia SR-332 in most cases.
MIL-HDBK-217F, however, should be used when it is required to use by
the customers.
The case study of Touch-Machine Control Panel shows that the
predicted MTBF using Telcordia SR-332 is much larger than that of
MIL-HDBK-217F. The predicted MTBF of F company’s CNC system with
control panel implies that Telcordia SR-332 can be regarded as more
accurate prediction method than MIL-HDBK-217F.
목차
I. 서론 ··············································································································011. 연구 배경 및 목적 ·················································································012. 문헌 연구 ·································································································02II. 전자 장비 신뢰도 예측 ···········································································061. 전자 장비 신뢰도 예측 절차 ·······························································062. 전자 장비 신뢰도 예측 규격 ·······························································081) MIL-HDBK-217F Notice 2 ······························································092) Telcordia SR-332 Issue 3 ·································································153) 기타 신뢰도 예측 규격 ·······································································333. MIL-HDBK-217F와 Telcordia SR-332의 비교 분석 ····················341) 품질 인자 (Quality Factor)와 환경 인자 (Environment Factor)의 비교 ··································································································362) 고장률 산출 방법 비교 ·······································································39(1) 커패시터 (Capacitor) ·····································································40(2) 저항기 (Resistor) ···········································································54(3) 인덕터 (Inductor) ···········································································65(4) 다이오드 (Diode) ············································································72(5) 트랜지스터 (Transistor) ·······························································85(6) MIL-HDBK-217F와 Telcordia SR-332의 비교 결과 ···········97III. Touch-Machine Control Panel 사례 ·················································981. MIL-HDBK-217 적용 사례 ·······························································1012. Telcordia SR-332 적용 사례 ·····························································1063. 두 규격의 예측 결과 비교 분석 ·······················································110IV. 결론 ·········································································································113부록 1 ············································································································115부록 2 ············································································································123참고문헌 ········································································································129Abstract ·········································································································134
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0